↓ Skip to main content

The Roles of Rods, Cones, and Melanopsin in Photoresponses of M4 Intrinsically Photosensitive Retinal Ganglion Cells (ipRGCs) and Optokinetic Visual Behavior

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
44 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The Roles of Rods, Cones, and Melanopsin in Photoresponses of M4 Intrinsically Photosensitive Retinal Ganglion Cells (ipRGCs) and Optokinetic Visual Behavior
Published in
Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fncel.2018.00203
Pubmed ID
Authors

Melanie M. Schroeder, Krystal R. Harrison, Elizabeth R. Jaeckel, Hunter N. Berger, Xiwu Zhao, Michael P. Flannery, Emma C. St. Pierre, Nancy Pateqi, Agnieszka Jachimska, Andrew P. Chervenak, Kwoon Y. Wong

Abstract

Intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) mediate not only image-forming vision like other ganglion cells, but also non-image-forming physiological responses to light such as pupil constriction and circadian photoentrainment. All ipRGCs respond to light through their endogenous photopigment melanopsin as well as rod/cone-driven synaptic inputs. A major knowledge gap is how melanopsin, rods, and cones differentially drive ipRGC photoresponses and image-forming vision. We whole-cell-recorded from M4-type ipRGCs lacking melanopsin, rod input, or cone input to dissect the roles of each component in ipRGCs' responses to steady and temporally modulated (≥0.3 Hz) lights. We also used a behavioral assay to determine how the elimination of melanopsin, rod, or cone function impacts the optokinetic visual behavior of mice. Results showed that the initial, transient peak in an M4 cell's responses to 10-s light steps arises from rod and cone inputs. Both the sustainability and poststimulus persistence of these light-step responses depend only on rod and/or cone inputs, which is unexpected because these ipRGC photoresponse properties have often been attributed primarily to melanopsin. For temporally varying stimuli, the enhancement of response sustainedness involves melanopsin, whereas stimulus tracking is mediated by rod and cone inputs. Finally, the behavioral assay showed that while all three photoreceptive systems are nearly equally important for contrast sensitivity, only cones and rods contribute to spatial acuity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 88 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 32%
Researcher 8 9%
Student > Bachelor 8 9%
Student > Master 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 7 8%
Unknown 27 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 22 25%
Medicine and Dentistry 14 16%
Engineering 7 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 28 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 13 January 2023.
All research outputs
#3,169,595
of 24,032,151 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#654
of 4,465 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,966
of 330,422 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience
#28
of 122 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,032,151 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,465 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 330,422 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 122 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.